ORDER :

1. The petitioner was victim and also stood as witness in Special Criminal Case No. 8/2018, State of Chhattisgarh vs. Bhupendra Rathore. The accused in that special criminal case was acquitted by the learned Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ‘the Act of 1989’) of the charges under Section 376(2) of the IPC as well as Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989 finding that the victim/petitioner herein has not supported the case of the prosecution and the prosecution has failed to prove the aforesaid offences beyond reasonable doubt, and while acquitting, in paragraph 11 of the impugned judgment, the learned Special Judge has directed that separate proceeding be registered against the petitioner herein for giving false evidence, punishable under Sections 181, 182, 211 and 191 to 193 of the IPC, as application has been filed by the prosecution for the said purpose, pursuant to which fresh proceeding has also been registered being MJC No. 59/2018.

2. This petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the direction contained in paragraph 11 of the judgment dated 6-10-2018 passed by the Special Judge under the Act of 1989, Bilaspur, in Special Criminal Case No. 8/2018.

3. The petitioner was examined and cross-examined and discharged by the Special Judge under the Act of 1989 in which she has not supported the case of the prosecution and has also not supported her written report and her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. recorded before the Judicial Magistrate which led to acquittal of accused Bhupendra Rathore for offences under Sections 376(2) of the IPC and 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989, and upon conclusion of trial in that proceeding, the prosecution has filed an application under Section 344 of the Cr.P.C. for prosecuting the victim/petitioner herein for giving false evidence. Accordingly, a separate proceeding has been registered against the petitioner herein and the petitioner has been proceeded against for giving false evidence which has been challenged in this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

4. Mr. C.K. Kesharwani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that though the learned Special Judge directed for registration of fresh case under Section 344(1) of the Cr.P.C. for giving false evidence, but he has not recorded a finding in Special Criminal Case No. 8/2018 that the petitioner knowingly or willfully given false evidence which is sine qua non for proceeding against the petitioner under Section 344(1) of the Cr.P.C. in absence thereof, the proceedings are liable to be set aside.

5. Per contra, Mr. Arjit Tiwari, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondent No. 1, would support the impugned judgment and submit that since the petitioner has given false evidence and has not supported the statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and her written report lodged against the accused therein, the learned Special Judge has rightly passed order directing for registering separate case against the petitioner herein which is strictly in accordance in law and the petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the material available on record with utmost circumspection.

7. It is correct to say that the petitioner herein was victim and also stood as witness in the criminal proceeding launched on the written complaint made by her in which her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. was also recorded and in the said statement, she did not support the case of the prosecution and ultimately, the Special Judge acquitted the accused finding no evidence and further finding that the petitioner has not supported the case of the prosecution, but after acquittal, the trial Court/Special Judge has recorded a finding as stated in paragraph 11 of the judgment as under:

^^11- bl ekeys esa vfHk;kst